THE STONEWALL & THE STRIKE.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1914, 24 November 1913, Page 7

THE STONEWALL & THE STRIKE.

Sir,—Tho "Liberals" and the "Hod Feds" evidently have a good deal in common. Messrs. Soiliple, Jlieltey, Young, and Holland threatened to paralyse the trade and commerce of the Dominion (and were partially successful in (loins so) if they' wen; imt allowed to have their own way in the country. Xchv ivc have Sir Joseph Ward and liis (.oileaguus, of the alleged "Liberal" Opposition, paralysing the machinery-of I'arlwftiont for a precisely rimiiar "reason. The ; "R<"d i'Vdvi l ' 'have put vhe country to an enorirwus expense by their "hold up" of tile shipping companies, and of business generally, mil? have caused a large amount of'incouvenieftee, loss, and suffering, amongst townspeople and country folk alike. Sir Joseph Ward, by bis "hold up" of tho business of Parliament is putting tho country to further expense and iiicon'•omciiCT, besides -delaying urjMiitlvneeded reforms. The "Rod Feds" and Sir Joseph both profess to bo standing for certain principles. Aii. aualvsis of the situation in each ease shows that the "principles" involved are, again, identical—the right to do as they please and to coerce tho majority in doing it. How true it is that, under Sir Josoph Ward's leadership, "Liberalism" is fast becoming "tho email bay of the Federation of Labour,"

Sir Joseph Ward and certain of his supporters who are taking a prominent part in the present "stonewall" on the Legislative Amendment Bill claim to bo upnolding the principle of "majority rule." It would bo interesting to kiimv just wli.it they understand by that much-misapplied term, A moment's considm'fllicm should suffice to show that tJwvo is not a iiuju in tlte I'iirliainent of i\'ew Zealand to-day who can claim that hejtas been scut there by a majority of the electors of New Zealand, Me has polled a majority of the electors who have taken the trouble to record their in the particular district lie represents, but, beyond that, what mandate lias ho fop saying thai lie represents a majority of the' electors of the Dominion? That is, however, a mere aside. What I desire to now emphasise is this. In opposing tho repeal of tho Sct-eml Ballot, Sir Joseph Ward and his colleagues are, beyond all question, going against tho wishes of tiro majority of the electors. In support of that contention it is only necessary to cite tho facts that a majority, of the members oi' Urn present House of Representatives (.both Government and Opposition) pledged themselves, . if returned to Parliament, to vote for tho repeal of the Second Ballot. Why, then, are they now "stonewalling" the attempt the Government is making to bring about that repeal? Tho only reason that can bo assigned for their action is the fact that the Leader of tlio Opposition and his associates recognise that their political Salvation de-pends-upon Some sort of an alliance with tlio "Red Feds," which will secure lor the Liberals the "Red" votes where their candidates li.ive to face tho Second Ballot with Reform candidates, and which will also ensure the "Liberal" votes for the "Beds," when their candidates nro up against Reform party men. Of course, the "Reds" will jump at the alliance, and equally, of cmihse, when it is cemented, the "Beds" will dominate tho "Liberals"'—l am, etc., ANTI-HUMBUG.